Joe Ervin Lockridge v. Stephanie Martin

In the Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-21-00047-CV ___________________________ JOE ERVIN LOCKRIDGE, Appellant

V. STEPHANIE MARTIN, Appellee

On Appeal from the 431st District Court

Denton County, Texas Trial Court No. 20-7122-431

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Walker, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Walker

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Joe Ervin Lockridge attempts to appeal from the trial court’s order granting appellee Stephanie Martin’s motion to transfer venue. Because we do not have jurisdiction over Lockridge’s attempted appeal, we dismiss.

Lockridge filed suit against, among others, Martin in her official capacity as a Dallas County assistant district attorney, raising multiple tort claims. Martin moved to transfer venue of Lockridge’s claims against her to Dallas County because his claims were against a governmental entity—an assistant district attorney in her official capacity—setting mandatory venue in Dallas County. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 15.015. The trial court granted the motion to transfer venue. Lockridge filed a notice of appeal from the order.

We have jurisdiction to consider appeals only from final judgments or from interlocutory orders made immediately appealable by statute. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). The trial court’s venue order was not a final judgment, and a ruling on a motion to transfer venue is not subject to interlocutory appeal.1 See Tex. R. Civ. P. 87(6).

We notified Lockridge that we questioned our jurisdiction over his appeal and gave him an opportunity to show grounds to continue it. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3, 44.3. Lockridge responded but did not establish jurisdictional grounds supporting his appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss Lockridge’s appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

/s/ Brian Walker Brian Walker Justice

Delivered: April 15, 2021